Comparison of haemoglobin estimation of blood donors by specific gravity method, HemoCue method and automated haematology cell analyzer

IF 0.4 Q4 BIOLOGY Advances in Human Biology Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.4103/aihb.aihb_100_22
Nikhil Choudhari, Subhashis Das, Ravi Kumar
{"title":"Comparison of haemoglobin estimation of blood donors by specific gravity method, HemoCue method and automated haematology cell analyzer","authors":"Nikhil Choudhari, Subhashis Das, Ravi Kumar","doi":"10.4103/aihb.aihb_100_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Pre-donation haemoglobin (Hb) screening is among the foremost test done on blood donors to determine whether an individual is fit to donate with the intention of preventing inadvertent donation from an anaemic donor. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the three common Hb estimation methods, namely, copper sulphate (CuSO4) method, HemoCue photometer and automated cell counter in reporting the Hb levels of blood donors. Materials and Methods: CuSo4 specific gravity method, HemoCue and automated cell analyzer (Sysmex XN-550) were used to determine the Hb levels in blood samples of 500 donors. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the demographic details of the donor. Kappa statistics were used to determine the level of agreement between the three methods of Hb estimation. Results: HemoCue was found to be more sensitive (86.21%), whereas CuSo4 (97.88%) was found to be more specific. Kappa agreement was good between CuSo4 and Sysmex XN-550 (0.703), whereas it was moderate between HemoCue and Sysmex XN-550 (0.458). Conclusions: The CuSO4 method is still viable for Hb estimation among blood donors. Thus, it can be utilised as the primary screening method; however, follow-up testing with HemoCue or automated cell analyzer can be done to minimise unnecessary deferrals and false acceptance.","PeriodicalId":7341,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Human Biology","volume":"12 1","pages":"312 - 315"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Human Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aihb.aihb_100_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Pre-donation haemoglobin (Hb) screening is among the foremost test done on blood donors to determine whether an individual is fit to donate with the intention of preventing inadvertent donation from an anaemic donor. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the three common Hb estimation methods, namely, copper sulphate (CuSO4) method, HemoCue photometer and automated cell counter in reporting the Hb levels of blood donors. Materials and Methods: CuSo4 specific gravity method, HemoCue and automated cell analyzer (Sysmex XN-550) were used to determine the Hb levels in blood samples of 500 donors. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the demographic details of the donor. Kappa statistics were used to determine the level of agreement between the three methods of Hb estimation. Results: HemoCue was found to be more sensitive (86.21%), whereas CuSo4 (97.88%) was found to be more specific. Kappa agreement was good between CuSo4 and Sysmex XN-550 (0.703), whereas it was moderate between HemoCue and Sysmex XN-550 (0.458). Conclusions: The CuSO4 method is still viable for Hb estimation among blood donors. Thus, it can be utilised as the primary screening method; however, follow-up testing with HemoCue or automated cell analyzer can be done to minimise unnecessary deferrals and false acceptance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比重法、HemoCue法和全自动血细胞分析仪测定献血者血红蛋白的比较
简介:献血前血红蛋白(Hb)筛查是对献血者进行的最重要的检测之一,目的是确定个人是否适合献血,以防止贫血的献血者无意中献血。本研究的目的是比较三种常见的Hb估算方法,即硫酸铜(CuSO4)法、HemoCue光度计和自动细胞计数器,在报告献血者Hb水平方面的效果。材料与方法:采用CuSo4比重法、HemoCue和全自动细胞分析仪(Sysmex XN-550)测定500名献血员血液中Hb水平。描述性统计被用于分析捐赠者的人口统计细节。Kappa统计用于确定三种Hb估计方法之间的一致性水平。结果:发现HemoCue更敏感(86.21%),而CuSo4(97.88%)更特异。CuSo4和Sysmex XN-550之间的Kappa一致性良好(0.703),而HemoCue和SysmexXN-550(0.458)之间的Kap帕一致性中等。因此,它可以用作初级筛选方法;然而,可以使用HemoCue或自动细胞分析仪进行后续测试,以最大限度地减少不必要的延迟和错误接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rethinking the Efficacy of Natural and Synthetic Folic Acid on Human Health and Looking into a Better Alternative Effective Programmes to Reduce Inappropriate Dispensing of Antibiotics in Community Pharmacies Especially in Developing Countries Dengue Dynamics: A Global Update Evaluation of invasive tumour front in primary and secondary oral squamous cell carcinoma – A reliable prognostic parameter Study of the cellular senescence process in human umbilical cord Wharton's jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1